Topic: What the Purslow minutes say about the New Stadium

[Billy1561]

But even now you still see spaces in the away end for some clubs. I wonder if the visiting clubs are charged by the block or just tickest sold?

[charles]

Can anyone shed any insight on to why we are only planning a 60,000+ seater? Obviously money and a lack of if it is the main reason, but were there ever any considerations in to making it an 80,000 seater. It makes a hell of a statement for the club and means the Manc's no longer have the biggest ground in the prem.

[CraigDS]

Can anyone shed any insight on to why we are only planning a 60,000+ seater? Obviously money and a lack of if it is the main reason, but were there ever any considerations in to making it an 80,000 seater. It makes a hell of a statement for the club and means the Manc's no longer have the biggest ground in the prem.

We arent just planning a 60k seater.

That is the max the council will allow without a full transport plan being implemented, so for the ease of planning and to quicken time constraints and costs, the club applied for the max possible (60k) but have made the design so it can be easily changed during construction to a 73k seater.

All the yanks have ever spoken about is of the 73k seater being what opens on the first day, now obviously you can take what they say with a bucket of salt, but I do think that is what the general plan is.

[Billy1561]

We arent just planning a 60k seater.

That is the max the council will allow without a full transport plan being implemented, so for the ease of planning and to quicken time constraints and costs, the club applied for the max possible (60k) but have made the design so it can be easily changed during construction to a 73k seater.

All the yanks have ever spoken about is of the 73k seater being what opens on the first day, now obviously you can take what they say with a bucket of salt, but I do think that is what the general plan is.

I think that the 73000 seat is Hicks doing and Gillett would be happy for the lesser as it's cheaper. Hicks being full of bluster wanted his ego massaged with the bigger size.
In actual fact imho the 73000 plan is more than adequate.

[charles]

We arent just planning a 60k seater.

That is the max the council will allow without a full transport plan being implemented, so for the ease of planning and to quicken time constraints and costs, the club applied for the max possible (60k) but have made the design so it can be easily changed during construction to a 73k seater.

All the yanks have ever spoken about is of the 73k seater being what opens on the first day, now obviously you can take what they say with a bucket of salt, but I do think that is what the general plan is.

Thats awesome. Thanks for clearing it up for me mate.

[Paul Gardner]

Thats awesome. Thanks for clearing it up for me mate.

The pictures on the official site are also the 73k ones. Can't see it ever getting built under Hicks and Gillett though.

[Trousers]

It's Hicks who decided to go for a 73,000 capacity stadium. I very much doubt there was any method to his decision other than sheer ego - I seem to recall he wanted to beat United originally.

Liverpool did do a lot of work on it before H&G arrived and conluded a 60,000 seater was the optimum size.

As some may know I have huge reservations about the HKL stadium design. I think we could be left with an over-priced white elephant as a result of decisions taken by a man who knows fuck all about football and whose architects are similarly ignorant.

Alan did that not have more to do with the transport infrastructure that the club would undoubtedly have to finance if the stadium went above 61,000?

[Alan_X]

I don't think so. I do recall a threshold where improvements to road travel, parking and buses would not cope and the rail line upgrade was required. That may have been around the 60,000 seater mark in which case it would have formed part of the cost-benefit analysis.


I think a 60,000 seater is a pretty cost effective structure and apart from that, very few clubs sell out on that scale. I know the weather was a factor and it was mid-week but a crowd of just over 31,000 watched the Reading replay. That's 42,000 short of the capacity of the new stadium. Wolves didn't sell out and there are tickets available for The Europa League home leg.


I can't see us selling out a 73,000 seater on more than a few occasions.

[Billy1561]

I can't see us selling out a 73,000 seater on more than a few occasions.

Midweek may well be an issue particularly if we are out of all comps etc. However, the rest of the time there are loads of people i know who cannot get through on the ticket lines and as a consequence don't even bother to try sometimes.

[Trousers]

I don't think so. I do recall a threshold where improvements to road travel, parking and buses would not cope and the rail line upgrade was required. That may have been around the 60,000 seater mark in which case it would have formed part of the cost-benefit analysis.


I think a 60,000 seater is a pretty cost effective structure and apart from that, very few clubs sell out on that scale. I know the weather was a factor and it was mid-week but a crowd of just over 31,000 watched the Reading replay. That's 42,000 short of the capacity of the new stadium. Wolves didn't sell out and there are tickets available for The Europa League home leg.


I can't see us selling out a 73,000 seater on more than a few occasions.

The threshold was definitely 61,000, and I was under the impression if it went beyond that then they'd have to open the Bootle line up as well with the station based at the end of Stanley Park Avenue South.

[CraigDS]

I know the weather was a factor and it was mid-week but a crowd of just over 31,000 watched the Reading replay. That's 42,000 short of the capacity of the new stadium.

It was a major issue, as not only were the roads around the stadium still covered in snow (I know as I nearly went arse over tit walking from the car), but it had been snowing all day as well so a lot of people were concerned about the game being called off and/or them getting stuck there!!

If you look at other exmaples against lower league sides, it was 43k versus Havant and Waterlooville. 42k versus Luton. etc.

Obviously these are below what the capacity would be, but you'd have a bigger range of pricing on the tickets, we'd have more ST holders who are compelled to come, more fans who will attempt to get a ticket where as now they dont bother due to either the poor way we sell them or the fact most people think they are sold out all the time.

[ttnbd]

pricing will have been a factor. charge a tenner and the games would have sold out

[Billy1561]

pricing will have been a factor. charge a tenner and the games would have sold out

I haven't worked it out but i guess the owners would be happy with a few thousand short and charge full price compared with a full house at subsidised prices? I know there is the other sales from extra fans to consider too like merchandising and food & drink etc.

[ttnbd]

it's cost benefit analysis. charging 16 notes and getting a full house would generate the same cash as 31k attending at 24 notes. while if the game had sold out at 24 notes then it would only have generated an extra 350k in ticket sales than charging 16 notes

[No666]

The bandwagon fans are deserting already if you go by the fact that Thomas Cook had packages available for the derby in the week previous. Surely the catch-22 is that this stadium is only viable if there is on-field success/near-success because there comes a point when you're reducing ticket prices to a non-viable level? And aren't they building this 'sucker' in order to tap into the high-spend corporate market, rather than to appeal to those of us who are counting our tenners?

[CraigDS]

And aren't they building this 'sucker' in order to tap into the high-spend corporate market, rather than to appeal to those of us who are counting our tenners?

Well they are going to keep the same % of split between normal season tickets, corporate, etc. so you could argue that isnt the case - although they are obviously designing a modern stadium which will cater more to the modern day football fan which will include more boxes, etc.

[Redsfan71]

It's Hicks who decided to go for a 73,000 capacity stadium. I very much doubt there was any method to his decision other than sheer ego - I seem to recall he wanted to beat United originally.

Liverpool did do a lot of work on it before H&G arrived and conluded a 60,000 seater was the optimum size.

Alan, I remember going to a LFC supporters club meeting at Anfield on or about the day that Rick Parry first announced LFC's plans for a new stadium.  At that meeting he stated that the club's desire was for a 75000 capacity stadium, but that it was subject to cost and analysis work. part of his reasoning at that time albeit given as an off the cuff reply was simply to have a bigger stadium than Man U.  Maybe Hicks simply jumped on the back of that.

What i do like about the new stadium is the Kop end and i've also seen a youtube video (link is somewhere on RAWK) where the architect is lecturing to a group of students in USA during which time he spends sometime discussing our proposed new stadium.  I have to say, he really did come across as he had really got the mentality of Liverpool's support and the requirements of the stadium.

For me, i hope the new stadium is of a size that is regularly full to capacity, while enabling the ticket demands (and prices) to be met.  I also hope that they've studied how to project the sound from the roof of the Kop to the best acoustic effect.

[adwhite40]

Can't see this happening for a long long time!

[CraigDS]

Alan, I remember going to a LFC supporters club meeting at Anfield on or about the day that Rick Parry first announced LFC's plans for a new stadium.  At that meeting he stated that the club's desire was for a 75000 capacity stadium, but that it was subject to cost and analysis work. part of his reasoning at that time albeit given as an off the cuff reply was simply to have a bigger stadium than Man U.  Maybe Hicks simply jumped on the back of that.

In 2002, when the original plans were announced, OT's capacity was only 68k (approx) - so why Parry would pluck 75k out the air I dont know.

[Redsfan71]

In 2002, when the original plans were announced, OT's capacity was only 68k (approx) - so why Parry would pluck 75k out the air I dont know.

Don't know Craig, he may have said 70000 to be fair, my memory ain't that good, but he defo said it would be good to have a bigger stadium than Man U.

[west_london_red]

Just fucking shocking how long the stadium has been discussed for and still nothing.

[TSC]

Surely the catch-22 is that this stadium is only viable if there is on-field success/near-success because there comes a point when you're reducing ticket prices to a non-viable level?

You're absolutely corret of course and unfortunately this is a key issue which the owners apparently are not keyed in to.  They appear to assume our core support (Ie those who'll attend irrespective of the level of success/performance) will always be enough to fill a 75k seater or whatever, and that the corporate market will always be there.  When it won't be the case.  You need to invest on the playing side.

Just fucking shocking how long the stadium has been discussed for and still nothing.

Shocking, yes.  Not a surprise though.

[redprodigal]

Midweek may well be an issue particularly if we are out of all comps etc. However, the rest of the time there are loads of people i know who cannot get through on the ticket lines and as a consequence don't even bother to try sometimes.

You're dead right. I posted this previously but I don't think many people realise just how many fans don't bother because of the difficulties.

For those saying we won't fill a 73000 capacity ground I have to admit that I shared your thoughts for a while but having thought about it in more detail I'm not so sure this is true.

I think most would agree that we have enough support both locally and around the country and Europe to fill the ground most weeks. The biggest stumbling block to this in my opinion is the way that we sell the tickets.

The online and phones system is a big turn off to thousands of fans. Reasons for this:
1. You have to pay £29 join the membership without being guaranteed a ticket.
2. The tickets go on sale in working hours when thousands of people cannot get access to a computer or phone.
3. Even if you can get access to a computer the online system frequently crashes, and even if it is working ok there is still a queue to get on. When you do get on there is a chance that the tickets are sold out.
4. Even if you can't access a computer but can access a phone, the queue is long and if you are lucky enough to get on at all this often proves ridiculously expensive due to the excessive time spent waiting in the queue.

If however we had a 73000 capacity stadium most of these problems would disappear.
1. People wouldn't mind paying the membership fee because it would guarantee them a ticket 90% of the time.
2. Due to the extra amount of tickets available there would still be tickets on sale when people got home from work and through the night, as they are at this moment with Everton tickets.
3. This makes it very easy to buy tickets and dismisses points 3 and 4 above.

Imagine if you're sitting at home in the evening and you can just go online and buy tickets for any game at any time. This makes it much more attractive and opens the gate for thousands more fans who at the present time find it way too much hassle to even attempt to do so.

I'm not suggesting that we would fill the ground every week and certainly not for certain midweek games against smaller clubs but I think a lot of people would be surprised how many fans there are out there who want to go and watch us but who just won't even attempt to given the present system.

[jwilgar]

Midweek may well be an issue particularly if we are out of all comps etc. However, the rest of the time there are loads of people i know who cannot get through on the ticket lines and as a consequence don't even bother to try sometimes.

I agree, so it is not just a bigger stadium we need but a bigger ticket call centre and a better website with more bandwidth (which is also difficult to access sometimes)

[Billy1561]

From the clubs point of view i suspect they would want the biggest feasable capacity purely because bums on seats = more matchday revenue and merchandising sales.
From the fans perspectve they would wish tickets to be available for any game in the footballing calendar and for that process to be simplified so that a quick phone call or a few clicks of the mouse ensures tickets in hand reasonably quickly. In reality it's unlikely in the short term  but at least we can dream.

[CraigDS]

I really dont know why the ticketing hasnt been sorted out, as bigger and more complex events are sold using much better systems that are readily available to us. I fail to see how its a complex job to fix really.

[Billy1561]

I really dont know why the ticketing hasnt been sorted out, as bigger and more complex events are sold using much better systems that are readily available to us. I fail to see how its a complex job to fix really.

My suspicion is that however bad the current system is they still sell all the tickets for the majority of games so it really isn't an issue for the club if we suffer in the process or not.
Now put a bigger stadium into the equasion and there will be no choice but to improve the ticketing arrangements to reap the benefits of the enlarged capacityand as you say Craig it can't be that difficult.

[Billy1561]

@ redprodigal
The £29 membership fee seems steep when not even guaranteeing a ticket. The club should imho refund that from ticket sales say a fiver each time you have a successful purchase.

[redprodigal]

@ redprodigal
The £29 membership fee seems steep when not even guaranteeing a ticket. The club should imho refund that from ticket sales say a fiver each time you have a successful purchase.

They will never refund that money. It's a great way of them getting all that money up front for nothing. You're right though, it is steep, especially for those who are often unsuccessful in getting tickets.
A 70,000 plus stadium would solve all these problems though. Everyone who wanted a ticket would be able to get one with very little hassle.

[Billy1561]

They will never refund that money. It's a great way of them getting all that money up front for nothing. You're right though, it is steep, especially for those who are often unsuccessful in getting tickets.
A 70,000 plus stadium would solve all these problems though. Everyone who wanted a ticket would be able to get one with very little hassle.

Apart from Man U EFC Arse Chelsea and Champs league Barca Real etc always assuming we qualified 

[danwms]

Half way through feb and still not more news.

[Alan_X]

Half way through feb and still not more news.

As the minutes said Easter before we'd know anything that's not surprising.

[SP]

In a larger stadium, the number of all red memberships could even fall. Most games could get to General Sale in a larger stadium. If games are getting to General Sale, why would some who wants to go to 1 or 2 games a year get a membership?

The 0844 money harvesting scheme works for the club. If Ian Ayre ever grudgingly agrees to answer questions again, can SOS ask him how much money the club makes from the 0844 number? It is rubbish, but the status quo is easier and probably initially cheaper than implementing a new system.

[Billy1561]

As the minutes said Easter before we'd know anything that's not surprising.

Easter is Sunday 4th April this year. Good friday is the 2nd so about six weeks ish. But to defend CP he said he was hopeful but could not promise, so could well extend beyond that right up to July possibly.

[CraigDS]

Its only the investment front we are going to hear anything about before the end of the season imo.

Any new full owner, or part investor, is going to want to look at the situation fully with regards to funding needed, etc. and then make a decision so that isnt going to be a quick decision.

[OohCampione]

As the minutes said Easter before we'd know anything that's not surprising.

Easter comes and goes.........